Does Romans 4:5 proves "Sola Fide" of the Protestants?


Romans 4:5
However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

But however it contradicts with the portion of James that says works are important.


We can do this here too. If you want. Because these words in this book you don’t believe in seem really important. So it’s got to be important to get them right. Well. If you think so.

How about this idea. Try this for you.

What is a guy who just talks about his love for his girl. But who never does anything at all for her?

Talk is cheap. Actions prove you mean it.

But still. It’s also important to believe in what you’re doing. You’ve got to have that belief. Or else why are you doing it? Are you doing it for show? Or to win friends? Or for money?

Because those two things are equal, but different. So yeah. A guy’s gotta have faith. Then he’s also gotta haul *** and work. To prove it. Not maybe so much to himself. But really to others. Because people judge you more by your works than your happy glowing face.

I mean if you and I were in an alley. And I saw you were having car trouble. It would be the Christian in me to want to help out. Even if you were sorta grumpy. So then you’d ask me all sorts of questions as I fixed your car (because I can do that). And I’d mention in passing that I was Catholic. And then from then on you might not have such bad feelings for Catholics. You might meet a few more who also help you out. And the next thing you know we’re all buddies together. Getting invited over for your induction party. Into the Church. Because that’s how this thing works.

I don’t know if that helps.

Peace souldiver.



About midway through this link, you will find your question addressed in detail.


Eph 2:7-10

Scripture doesn’t contradict. It balances

Everything to do with humans is paradoxical. Likewise the rest of creation, the whole of nature. How much more so what is to do with God


It says their faith is credited as righteousness, it does not say that is all they will ever need. Good works and good faith are both righteous because they are both good. But neither one can save you by itself.


Are you sure you are an atheist?



St. Paul here is explaining how a man that is not yet in a covenant relation with GOD, neither circumcised nor baptised, CAN be attracted by the love of GOD (Grace) and become a member of the family of Christ, The Church HE founded.
And to do this he uses Abraham who we read in the previous verse that “Abram believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice.” notice St. Paul uses the original name of Abraham before GOD changed his name. When Abram “believed” he was not circumcised yet. However GOD accepted him into HIS family. ONLY because he believed.
NOW very important to note also that none of our works count for anything unless we are members of the family. For Jesus said that apart from HIM we cannot do anything.
Because Jesus is GOD and HE is outside time HIS redemption action is valid for all humans that ever lived since Adam, hence Abram works were counted to his credit even though he never met Jesus.

What this mean is that our works merit a reward when GRACE which is freely infused into us make those works acceptable to GOD.
And as you correctly noted it is a requirement for one who has faith and Grace to do good works.
For a faith without works is a dead faith.
And this is the reason why, the Catholic Church teaches, that even an unbaptised person who never knew Jesus through no fault of his/her own can be saved. If he/she followed his/her conscience (the law written in the heart of every human.

Hope this helps you.


I’d start by asking, “what ‘work’ is Paul referring to” and “what does he mean by ‘trust’?”

Looking at Romans, when Paul uses “works” he usually means “Works of the Mosiac Law”.

The word “trust” actually works - no pun intended - against Sola Fide. The difference between the “intellectual assent only” (what most Protestants mean by faith) and Trust is seen in Scripture in John 3:36. Paraphrasing, whoever “believes” (related to ‘trust’) is saved, but whoever DISOBEYS is not.

“Trust” automatically denotes obedience or action.

Maybe a story can help illustrate. When bullet resistant vest were first coming out. A bunch of LAPD officers watched a sales rep shoot himself in the chest, while wearing a vest. The vest stopped the bullet. A bunch of the officers intellectually assented to the fact that the vests can stop some bullets, so they bought one.

Later, when serving a search warrant, the bad guy in the house began shooting through the front door at the officers. All the officers were wearing vests. Some ran away, some kept running towards. Which ones “trusted” their vests, among other things?

Hope this helps.
God Bless :signofcross:
Poor Knight for Christ and His Church


Demons don’t trust God, yet they believe. Trust involves faith and hope, which, ideally, produce love which always produces works-the right kinds for the right reasons. Matt 25:31-46 shows how we’ll be judged on these kinds of works.
“The only thing that counts is faith working through love”. Gal 5:6

“…if I have a faith that can move mountains but have not love, I am nothing”.

“Now these three remain, faith, hope, and love, but the greatest of these is love”. Both from 1Cor 13

“At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love”. St John of the Cross**


Jimmy Akin has posted an analysis (link below) of the contrasting meanings that the word “faith” has acquired in Catholic and Protestant use. His starting point is the phrase “faith, hope, and charity.” He says that Catholic writers, when they use the word “faith,” tend to bear in mind that Paul is using the three words to discriminate between three different things, with the result that “faith” (in the Catholic sense) is separate from hope and charity, which are also separate from one another. In Protestant use, however, “faith” is commonly understood as a shorthand expression (I’m paraphrasing Jimmy Akin here) for faith-hope-charity taken as a single virtue. If I’ve understood him correctly, his argument boils down to this: Yes, justification is by faith alone if you’re using “faith” in the Protestant sense, but not if you’re using it in the Catholic sense.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit